Re: hadronic physics and aether
From: Bjoern Feuerbacher (feuerbac_at_thphys.uni-heidelberg.de)
Date: 12/17/04
- Next message: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: Why absolute motion?"
- Previous message: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: "archaic" view of atom structure"
- In reply to: Creighton Hogg: "hadronic physics and aether"
- Next in thread: Creighton Hogg: "Re: hadronic physics and aether"
- Reply: Creighton Hogg: "Re: hadronic physics and aether"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:54:38 +0100
Creighton Hogg wrote:
> My interest is strongly in QCD these days and I find hadronic physics an
> incredibly rich topic, but I've noticed that here on usenet it seems like
> all the theories proposed don't even attempt to touch the vast amount of
> data on hadronic physics. For example, not only would an aether/unified
> theory/whatever have to explain how you get hadron jets from e- e+
> collisions, but they'd have to explain the ratio between jet events and
> purely leptonic events. How would you explain parton distribution
> functions with any of the theories proposed around here? I've never seen
> good explanations of these things.
Well, that could be due to the simple reason that essentially all people
who propose aether theories have never even heard about hadron jets,
parton distribution functions and the like - they are utterly ignorant
about most of the evidence accumulated in the last about 70 years...
[snip]
Bye,
Bjoern
- Next message: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: Why absolute motion?"
- Previous message: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: "archaic" view of atom structure"
- In reply to: Creighton Hogg: "hadronic physics and aether"
- Next in thread: Creighton Hogg: "Re: hadronic physics and aether"
- Reply: Creighton Hogg: "Re: hadronic physics and aether"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
